Posted on 11/06/2012 6:16:38 AM PST by Kaslin
The government has the power to seize your assets for a crime you did not commit. That's essentially the argument being made in a Boston federal court this week as the U.S. Department of Justice and Tewksbury (Mass.) Police Department work to take Motel Caswell away from its owner, Russ Caswell.
The libertarian-leaning legal team Institute for Justice took on Caswell's case pro bono, attorney Scott Bullock told me, because this case "is really taking civil forfeiture where it has not gone in the past."
The government wants to take Caswell's motel, not because Caswell is guilty of dealing drugs or other crimes but because some of his guests broke the law. A legal brief cites 15 drug crimes, including distributing heroin and manufacturing methamphetamine, that prompted police to arrest Caswell guests from 1994 to 2008.
"We're trying to make the property and the location safe," said Christina DiIorio-Sterling, spokeswoman for U.S. Attorney Carmen Ortiz.
TripAdvisor reviews make Motel Caswell sound like the place I stayed at when I covered the Democratic National Convention in Charlotte, N.C. One cab driver heard the name and insisted I pay cash.
DiIorio-Sterling noted that the government had pushed for a settlement that would have required Caswell to pay $167,500 and agree to sell or shutter the property. He refused.
Bullock assured me that the Main Street motel isn't seedy, just the cheapest room in town. "We get a cross section of society," Caswell told me.
The legal point, said Bullock: An innkeeper should not be held responsible for "transient guests that occasionally use the motel for illicit drug activity behind closed doors."
The Institute for Justice has experience with governments going after the property of people without the means to fight back. The institute represented working-class homeowner Susette Kelo after the town of New London, Conn., tried to seize her house under eminent domain for a private waterfront development project. In 2005, the U.S. Supreme Court infamously ruled 5-4 for New London.
In a righteous dissent, Justice Sandra Day O'Connor wrote that if governments can kick people out of their homes for economic development, "the specter of condemnation hangs over all property. Nothing is to prevent the state from replacing any Motel 6 with a Ritz-Carlton, any home with a shopping mall, or any farm with a factory."
Voila. Caswell's father built the one-story, 56-room motel in 1955. Because it's family-run with no mortgage, said Bullock, a seizure would deliver "pure profit for law enforcement." The Tewksbury police stand to pocket 80 percent of the $1 million or more Caswell believes the property is worth.
The government doesn't have to prove Caswell was a party to or even knew what was going on in guests' $56 rooms.
In 1999, Congress passed a law to curb civil asset forfeiture abuses, citing a Houston Chronicle editorial that argued, "Good people should not have to fear property seizure because they operate business in high-crime areas. Nor should they forfeit their property because they have failed to do the work of law enforcement."
Yet it's happening all over again. Quoth Bullock, "I think it's fair to say they expected Mr. Caswell not to fight this all the way."
The truth is the government resents the fact that you “own” property. In their marxist minds, all property and the means of production MUST be in the hands of the collectivity.
So they’re taking it a little at a time.
I would think the landlord is innocent, but maybe in this case the government has proof the landlord of this Hotel had long term knowledge of these events going on.
Do we know for a fact this owner of the hotel was an angel?
Bald faced asset seizure is just one more example of why this shaky economy is shaky. Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of Happiness? Please, the city has it’s needs and they quite obviously trump individual rights.
So a foundational principle based on private property rights of the INDIVIDUAL, is just conveniently forgotten in the interest of...
I don’t care if he is an angel or not..
he did not commit a crime, he should not be prosecuted, and yes, seizure of assets is the same as prosecution..
just another innocent victim in the war on drugs..
Things like this and Baltimore doing 24 hours survailiance has me more and more libertarian each day.
Do we know for a fact this owner of the hotel was an angel?...It does not matter if he was or not. #1. He does not have authority to investigate what his customers do or don’t do. #2 They (the cops) did not ( according to the article, I don’t know) have evidence the drug dealers cut him in on any profits of illicit drug dealing and #3 Anything having to do with a third party is UNREASONABLE search and seizure. He may be dirty as hell, but we have (maybe) a Constitution.
What the hell does that have to do with anything? Have you committed any sins this week? Give me all your property.
Do we know for a fact this owner of the hotel was an angel?
Shouldn’t really matter should it?
Free and easy government asset seizure is the easy way out, and just another tax the “people” have to bear. Government reaps your reward so to speak. I’m agin it just like I’m agin no knock raids by government vigilantes dressed like shock troops serving warrants for search seizure arrest or whatever.
Law enforcement officers are a public servants, so if you can’t do your job in a suit and tie, by politely knocking at the door and announcing your presence like normal folks, and without brandishing firearms and serve a warrant the way they used to be served, you become part of the problem.
The more peacefully you arrive at the door, the more likely you are to have someone actually open the door without violence. Crooks aren’t completely stupid, so why compound your problems by offing an officer who is not a threat.
Unlike the usual murderous response from attacker and attacked during no knock raids.
See WOD for the start of free and easy asset seizure.
Because when government takes over tenement housing, no drug crimes are ever committed there.
< /sarc>
Well, be prepared to be hated by conservatives...
conservatives have a very hard time accepting the constitution as written..
you see, libs and conservatives basically want the same thing, to control us with laws and regulations..
the only difference is the side of the political spectrum that the laws and regulations originate from...
we small l libertarians see this and know this, and this is why we are hated by conservatives..
Keynesian economics is also based on the presumption that government owns or controls the value of the money in your wallet and all your bank accounts, but that it also has the power to control and manipulate the time value of money (that is, the rate of interest depending upon the length of the debt contract).
In short, Keynesians conduct public policy as if all your money belong to us, and the primary goal of this is to enable government to conduct both welfare spending as well as financing wars that the public would not vote to pay for.
Keynesian economics goes hand in glove with socialist government policies. This is not an accident because both have the ultimate (meta-theme) goal of bringing about a secular utopia and indeed even a type of “salvation” for humanity.
This was settled decades ago. They CAN and WILL take your property. That’s life.
What the hell does that have to do with anything? Have you committed any sins this week? Give me all your property.
Some so-called "conservatives" will happily eat sh*t if the government tells them it's "War-On-Drugs Meatloaf." Pathetic.
"We're trying to make the property and the location safe," said Christina DiIorio-Sterling, spokeswoman for U.S. Attorney Carmen Ortiz.
There are some buildings in DC that should be taken over; Capitol Building and White House.
The 'feral government' has become a hostile invading and occupying force.
The function of government is to govern. They will take what we will relinquish.
If he had no knowledge of what was going on then it has no criminal intent. That is why I asked if he was an angel in this or did they find he had knowledge of some of what was going on?
I do know if they have some kind of proof the owner knew things were being sold or made under their roof that property could become forfeit.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.